To prevent spam users, you can only post on this forum after registration, which is by invitation. If you want to post on the forum, please send me a mail (h DOT m DOT w DOT verbeek AT tue DOT nl) and I'll send you an invitation in return for an account.
I have two questions regarding severe penalties and randomly selected applications:
1. Occurrence of severe penalties (B3, B4, B5, B6, B16, BGK, C16, JLP3, V5) has dropped drastically from 2015 to 2016 and 2017 (Penalties in general has also decreased from 2015). Below table gives the numbers for severe penalties.
Case-year |
Number of
applications |
Number of
applications with severe penalty |
Event Rate |
2015 |
14,750 |
1,189 |
8.1% |
2016 |
14,552 |
171 |
1.2% |
2017 |
14,507 |
291 |
2.0% |
What could be the possible reason for such a drop?
2. We see that some applications have selected_random and selected_risk both populated as "1". Below given are the numbers for such applications:
2015 |
594 |
2016 |
547 |
2017 |
509 |
Total |
1,650 |
Why are these applications selected randomly as well as on the basis of risk factor?
Answers
2. The selection process is quite involved, for instance, an applicant may be selected by risk assessment for another type of subsidy (other than direct payment), and then an inspection is carried out jointly for many of her applications. For the sake of answering the business questions, you can consider these applications to be inspected due to risk assessment.
Also, BGP, B5F and BGKV penalties have zero applications in 2015 and 2016. Given below is a table for this:
Were these penalties introduced in 2017?
It is also possible that new penalty codes are introduced while others are not in use anymore. The 3 codes you listed were indeed introduced in 2017.